Snub .38 ammo choices/thread move

[Chuck Haggard]

Is it true that the Rem 148WC isn't loaded flush with the case. .

Nope, they are loaded flush just like every other factyory WC round that I have seen.

[LSP972]

Apparently I have stepped on a bunch of toes in this thread.

I don't think so. You've been asking intelligent questions, and making remarks based on the best info you had.

Keep this uppermost in your mind; all this "published data" regarding expansion, penetration, etc, are TESTS… tests, and only that. For instance, the Kind & Knox 10% ballistic gelatin, which is the accepted industry standard for this sort of thing, was selected because it is the artificial, reproducible medium that most closely resembles homogenous human tissue. The two big problems there are 1) a human body is NOT "homogenous"; it is soft here, tough there, damned hard here and there (bone). The gelatin was NEVER intended to replicate what happens when bullet meets flesh. It was intended as a reproducible comparator, to level the field, so to speak. It does that quite well. 2) the key word above is REPRODUCIBLE. The gelatin has some fairly narrow parameters, in that it must be prepared and stored (if not used immediately) in the proper manner to maintain a uniform consistency. It is quite possible (and this has occurred) to get skewed results when those parameters are not strictly adhered to.

The reason you don't see a lot of recommendations for the old "FBI load" (158gr LSWCHP +P) is, IMO (and I may step on some toes with this; don't care), due to a lot of younger "instructors" who have no idea about how well that load has performed down through the ages, and don't care anyway because the latest/greatest loudenboomer toe-tagger-special has got to be better… right?

A good friend of mine is retired LAPD, and was in five gunfights during his career; all using a 6" K-38. The first three, he was using 158gr RNL standard pressure ammunition. That one is indeed rather anemic and not known for excessive "stopping power". By the time of his last two, LAPD brass had grudgingly shifted to a 158gr lead SWC bullet. He told me that those two miscreants reacted much quicker- as in stopped fighting and lay down- to that ammunition.

But again, we're back to the snubby and its short barrel. You're simply not going to get any meaningful velocity with even +P ammunition from a snubby. I'm sure you've read this here before… pistols in general just don't have much to offer, in terms of shutting down an amped-up violent antagonist. To be more blunt, many of the stops I am aware of were due more to psychological, as opposed to physical, incapacitation. In other words, the bad guy said to himself "OMG, I've been shot!" and gave up. True physical incapacitation via pistol return fire is like real estate; everything depends upon location.

Which is why some knowledgeable folks are comfortable with a less-powerful load, because they know they will be better able to put their bullets where they will do the most good, instead of fighting blast and recoil and hoping for the best.

Anyway… no, you're doing fine. I, OTOH, may have come across as if I was chastising you. If so, sorry 'bout that.

.

[LSP552]

I don't know if the extra weight of the WC compensates for the extra speed of the SBGD. If both fail to expand and both penetrate to similar depths, does it make a difference? Does the extra juice of the SBGD allow it to penetrate intermediate barriers better than the slower WC, and does this make a difference? These were my questions, and believing the SBGD was still the better choice led me to my earlier conclusion.

I'd bet money that the WC will out penetrate the Gold Dot in flesh, unless you add intermediate barriers and then I don't know. Chuck posted a denim penetration test earlier in this thread. I personally like and have used the both the Gold Dot SB and Hornady Critical Defense in the past. What brings me back to WCs is the fact that I shoot them better and faster out of an Airweight J-frame. They also hit POA from both of my Airweights. Heavily recoiling Airweights are no longer friendly to my arthritis.

I don't think any J-frame .38 ammo has both great barrier penetration and expansion. Since everything about the J-frame Airweights is a compromise, I tend to lean toward shootability. The WCs will cut a deep wound with manageable recoil from an Airweight revolver, which is about all I think reasonable to expect from a 2" .38 Spl. I don't remember ever seeing a entire FBI test protocol from a 2" .38.

DocGKR and Chuck have lots of insight in this stuff.

[Chuck Haggard]

WCs wouldn't be able to pass some of the FBI tests, such as the steel/"car door" test. Simply wouldn't even get through the metal to touch the gel. Several well thought of loading's are in this same boat though. None of the "FBI loads", the +P 158gr LSWCHPs make it through the steel either when shot from a snub.

The only ammo in a snub that would be capable of passing all of the FBI test events for barrier and gel penetration would be a +P 158gr LSWC non HP, from looking at the actual FBI testing events. The Barnes might be close but I think it under penetrates on some of the tests.

I've been carrying WCs as of late due to; arthritis, lack of ability to get anything "better", WCs shoot to my sights and are accurate from my snubs (even when shot one handed/weak hand only), they penetrate well, and have a history of actually working on the street.

[Joe in PNG]

Funny how this place works. After reading this thread, I went out to buy a box of wadcutters for my model 36, and wound up getting a Shield instead.

[Chuck Haggard]

Article of interest;

http://www.handgunsmag.com/ammo/ammu...utters_200901/

[Chuck Haggard]

And a good article on snub ammo choices by Tom Givens in his Rangemaster newsletter;

http://www.rangemaster.com/wp-conten...Newsletter.pdf

[SAWBONES]

Keep this uppermost in your mind; all this "published data" regarding expansion, penetration, etc, are TESTS… tests, and only that. For instance, the Kind & Knox 10% ballistic gelatin, which is the accepted industry standard for this sort of thing, was selected because it is the artificial, reproducible medium that most closely resembles homogenous human tissue. The two big problems there are 1) a human body is NOT "homogenous"; it is soft here, tough there, damned hard here and there (bone). The gelatin was NEVER intended to replicate what happens when bullet meets flesh. It was intended as a reproducible comparator, to level the field, so to speak. It does that quite well. 2) the key word above is REPRODUCIBLE. The gelatin has some fairly narrow parameters, in that it must be prepared and stored (if not used immediately) in the proper manner to maintain a uniform consistency.

Yup.

Controlled-status gelatin test comparisons for handgun ammunition are fine, for what they're worth, but they're not worth everything.
While more useful than anecdotes, they predict very little about real world efficacy, which depends so much upon accurately hitting something important rather than projectile diameter or penetration.

[SAWBONES]

The .38 Special Remington 158gr LSWCHP tested from a "snubbie", fired into bare gelatin vs. denim-covered gelatin:

http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com/2...grain-lhp.html

http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com/2...rain-lead.html

[BigT]

A good friend of mine is retired LAPD, and was in five gunfights during his career; all using a 6" K-38. The first three, he was using 158gr RNL standard pressure ammunition. That one is indeed rather anemic and not known for excessive "stopping power". By the time of his last two, LAPD brass had grudgingly shifted to a 158gr lead SWC bullet. He told me that those two miscreants reacted much quicker- as in stopped fighting and lay down- to that ammunition.

I seem to recall Pat Rogers mentioning something similar on LF (or the CRAFT disease is getting worse) That NYPD had noticably better results with 158gr LSWC's than with the RNL. Even though, I assume, the Gel would tell us there performance is very similar. May tie into something Todd mentioned years back about certain rounds doing better than others even if the Gel numbers are similar.